Posted on 12/11/2011 6:18:26 AM PST by FlJoePa
STATE COLLEGE -- Minutes after Mike McQueary says he stumbled upon something between Jerry Sandusky and a boy in a Penn State shower in 2002, he went to his father’s State College home seeking advice.
There, Dr. Jonathan Dranov, a family friend and colleague of McQueary’s father, sat with the then 28-year-old graduate assistant and listened to his very first account of what he had seen, a source told The Patriot-News.
According to the source with knowledge of Dranov’s testimony before the grand jury, it went like this:
McQueary heard "sex sounds" and the shower running, and a young boy stuck his head around the corner of the shower stall, peering at McQueary as an adult arm reached around his waist and pulled him back out of view.
Seconds later, Sandusky left the shower in a towel.
That account is different from the hand-written statement obtained by The Patriot-News that McQueary provided for investigators when he was interviewed in 2010.
It’s also different than the summary of his grand jury testimony in the 23-page initial grand jury presentment.
In both of those accounts, McQueary says he witnessed Sandusky sodomizing a boy as he stood with his hands against a shower wall.
McQueary says the pair turned and looked at him before he left.
However, Dranov told grand jurors that he asked McQueary three times if he saw anything sexual, and three times McQueary said no, according to the source.
Because of that response, the source says, Dranov told McQueary that he should talk to his boss, head football coach Joe Paterno, rather than police.
The next day Paterno and McQueary talked, and Paterno’s response to the conversation was widely scrutinized when the grand jury presentment was made public in November.
Paterno said graphic detail, such as rape, was never mentioned to him. But public outcry led to his firing five days after Sandusky was charged.
But more importantly than public opinion, Mike McQueary’s story is a key element to all the criminal cases involved in the Sandusky scandal.
His witness testimony was the only evidence of an assault in 2002 presented to grand jurors, and his detailed account is the reason that perjury charges were filed against two ousted Penn State officials. Both said they were told only about horseplay that made McQueary uncomfortable, while McQueary testified he told them explicit details about a rape.
Repeated attempts to reach McQueary over the past month for comment have been unsuccessful. McQueary was placed on leave after receiving death threats as a result of his testimony about allegations against Jerry Sandusky from people who believe he did not do enough to stop the alleged assault.
Friday, former Athletic Director Tim Curley and Vice President Gary Schultz will face a preliminary hearing on charges of perjury and failure to report a crime.
The case against them is dependent on the premise that McQueary’s testimony is more credible than theirs. Saturday, attorneys for Curley and Schultz issued this statement in response to Dranov’s testimony:
"We have not seen the grand jury transcript, so it would be imprudent to comment on its content. But, if this information is true, and we believe it is, it would be powerful, exculpatory evidence, and the charges against our clients should be dismissed."
His testimony might also be important on Tuesday to the case against Sandusky.
Jerry Sandusky arraignment on new charges Enlarge ANDY COLWELL, The Patriot-News Former Penn State football defensive coordinator Jerry" Sandusky, right, leaves the office of Centre County District Justice Daniel A. Hoffman under escort by Pennsylvania State Police and Attorney General's Office officials in Bellefonte, Pa. on Thursday, Dec. 7, following a grand jury investigation related to numerous child sex charges. ANDYCOLWELL for The Patriot-News Jerry Sandusky is arraigned on new child sexual abuse charges gallery (10 photos)
Jerry Sandusky mug Jerry Sandusky arraignment on new charges Jerry Sandusky arraignment on new charges Jerry Sandusky arraignment on new charges Jerry Sandusky arraignment on new charges
Vowing to prove his innocence, Sandusky and his attorney, Joe Amendola, are sure to point out the inconsistencies in McQueary’s statements at a preliminary hearing in Bellefonte. Sandusky has been charged with more than 50 counts and maintained his innocence.
Since charges were filed Nov. 4, several variations of McQueary’s story have come out publicly.
His grand jury testimony says he heard slapping noises and saw a boy being sodomized by Sandusky. His hand-written statement to police says, "I did not see insertion. I am certain that sexual acts/the young boy being sodomized was occurring." He says the whole incident lasted about a minute. In an email he sent to friends following the firing of Joe Paterno, he says "I made sure it stopped," something not mentioned in the grand jury testimony or police statement. And now Dranov’s testimony describes a new scenario.
About two months after the incident McQueary describes in March 2002, Dranov and McQueary’s father, John, both physicians, had an unrelated meeting scheduled at Penn State with Gary Schultz, Dranov told the grand jury, according to the source.
Curious about how the story ended, Dranov inquired about what ever happened to Sandusky.
According to a source with knowledge of his testimony, Schultz told him then-university President Graham Spanier had met with Sandusky.
That’s something that isn’t mentioned in the grand jury presentment.
Spanier, who was forced to resign the same night Paterno was fired, testified before the grand jury that he had signed off on a decision to ban Sandusky from bringing children to the locker rooms in the future; however, Spanier, Curley and Schultz all deny they were ever informed a sexual assault occurred that night.
Attempts to reach Dranov were unsuccessful.
Sandusky, through Amendola, has offered yet another version of what happened in the showers. He doesn’t deny there was a boy showering with Sandusky that night, but Amendola says the child was surfing in the shower — horsing around — and never saw McQueary come into the locker room.
Instead, Amendola says, a few days later Sandusky was contacted by Curley, told that someone felt uncomfortable about what they’d seen, and Sandusky gave the name and phone number of the boy to Curley to help clear up the situation.
The grand jury report points out that no effort was made to contact the boy.
Again, why would he cover up for a retired coach and cover up by reporting it? I'd be really careful in judging before you know all the facts.
We know there was no follow up, because no one found the boy did they?
It couldn’t have been that difficult.
Why does anyone cover up this stuff?
You are aware of the 1998 showering incident?
There are several reasons....people don’t like to confront the ugliness of the crimes. People don’t like to confront a friend and former co-coach with the accusation. People don’t want the publicity of the eventual fall-out to reflect poorly on the university.
There could be all sorts of reasons.
What I cannot fathom is why was everyone so afraid of this guy?
The story if full of cowards who declined to take him on.
Look at the testimony about the janitors who were terrified.
What was so darn scary about this guy that everyone allowed to him to wander about unimpeded?
Actually, that’s incorrect.
Curley was the athletic director.
Schultz is a finance administrator who oversaw several departments - one of them being the campus police.
Since both were charged with perjury and failure to report, it’s safe to assume Schultz went nowhere with investigating the crime.
One tell-tale sign for JoePa would have been...that the pedophile kept popping up here and there - with boys.
So why did he report it at all? Why didn't he tell McQueary to report it since Paterno didn't see it himself?
That’s where it gets interesting doesn’t it?
Because - from that point on is where we have the actions/inactions that resulted in arrests.
Curley and Schultz are claiming they didn’t hear anything about sexual abuse.
The presentment has JoePa describing fondling and something of a sexual nature.
McQueary says he told everyone about the abuse.
As for your questions? Maybe the upcoming court proceeding will answer all that - maybe not.
If you want to count alerting Schultz as “reporting to the police” - well, the meeting with Schultz did not occur until one week after the child was raped.
What kind of a system is that?
And Schultz is saying he didn’t know anything about any rape.
Meanwhile...elsewhere on campus, students in the education department are taking classes on protecting children, mandatory reporting, how to spot abused kids and how to help them.
Did you read about the victims that came after 2002?
Do you not think it’s odd how they describe being taken to PSU Football events?
Haven’t you wondered what on earth these men were thinking when they saw this pedophile with boys?
Remember...JoePa took on Nixon. He once threatened Spanier with cutting off the fundraising spigot.
Why on earth did he allow a pedophile to keep hanging around his football program?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.